RESUMO
Purpose: To address cancer screening disparities and reduce cancer risk among sexual minority (SM) groups, this review identifies individual, interpersonal, and community/societal determinants of cancer screening (non)participation among differing SM identities. Methods: Seven scientific databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) used quantitative methods; (2) English language; (3) cancer screening focus; and (4) at least one SM group identified. Articles were excluded if: (1) analysis was not disaggregated by SM identity (n = 29) and (2) quantitative analysis excluded determinants of cancer screening (n = 19). The Sexual and Gender Minority Health Disparities Research Framework guided literature synthesis. Results: Twelve studies addressed cervical (n = 4), breast (n = 3), breast/cervical (n = 3), or multiple cancers (n = 2). Other cancers were excluded due to inclusion/exclusion criteria. The total sample was 20,622 (mean 1525), including lesbian (n = 13,409), bisexual (n = 4442), gay (n = 1386), mostly heterosexual (n = 1302), and queer (n = 83) identities. Studies analyzing individual-level determinants (n = 8) found that socioeconomic status affected cervical, but not breast, cancer screening among lesbian and bisexual participants (n = 2). At the interpersonal level (n = 7), provider-patient relationship was a determinant of cervical cancer screening among lesbian participants (n = 4); a relationship not studied for other groups. Studies analyzing community/societal determinants (n = 5) found that rurality potentially affected cervical cancer screening among lesbian, but not bisexual people (n = 3). Conclusions: This review identified socioeconomic status, provider-patient relationship, and rurality as determinants affecting cancer screening among SM people. While literature addresses diverse SM groups, inclusion/exclusion criteria identified studies addressing cisgender women. Addressing disparities in the identified determinants of cervical cancer screening may improve participation among SM women. Further research is needed to understand determinants of cancer screening unique to other SM groups.